browser_session_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool lists sessions and returns specific data, but doesn't cover important aspects like whether it's read-only (implied by 'List' but not explicit), potential errors if no sessions exist, or performance considerations. For a tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise and well-structured: a clear purpose statement followed by a bullet-point-like return format. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without waste, making it easy for an AI agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (0 parameters, no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It explains what the tool does and the return format, which is sufficient for basic use. However, it lacks context on behavioral traits like error handling or session state dependencies, leaving some gaps in completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately doesn't discuss parameters, focusing instead on the return values. This meets the baseline for tools with no parameters, as it avoids redundancy and adds value by explaining the output.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('browser sessions'), including what information is returned. It distinguishes from siblings like 'browser_session_connect' or 'browser_session_destroy' by focusing on listing rather than modifying sessions. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings (e.g., 'browser_inspect_*' tools), keeping it from a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, such as needing active sessions to list, or compare it to other tools like 'browser_session_connect' for session management. This lack of contextual usage information limits its effectiveness for an AI agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.